E 449 
.M94 
Copy 1 



BALLOT BOX 



AND 



BATTLE FIELD. 

TO VOTERS UNDER THE 
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, 



What we do by our agents, we do ourselves.' 



BdKTON: 
DOW & JACKSON'S PRESS. 
1842. 



BALLOT BOX AND BATTLE FIELD. 



TO VOTERS IN THE UNITED STATES 
GOVERNMENT. 

The object of this essay is to establish the fol- 
^owin^ position: Each voter in the United 
States government votes for the war-ma- 
king POWER, AND acts AS PRINCIPAL IN SHEDDING 

whatever blood is SHED BY IT. Each voter is 
virtually the jailor and hangman — the war-maker and 
commander-in-chief — and whatever robbery and 
murder are committed by Congress and the Presi- 
dent — by the army and navy — are done by him, and 
he, individually, must render an account thereof to 
the final Judge. 

If the position be true, it is no slight matter to as- 
sume the office of voter in this government. This 
would make it paramount in dignity and importance 
to all its other offices. When men vote, they are 
not aware that every ballot is gory and dripping with 
the hearts' blood of thousands — shed by him who 
casts it into the box. Is it so ? Let us see. 

The War-making Power. 

What is it ? Power over human life to destroy it 
for the benefit of the destroyers. We never kill our 
enemies for their good. To suppose it possible is 
an outrage on common sense. We cannot associate 
a kind and loving regard for their welfare with kil- 
ling them. 



Neither can we kill onr enemies to please God, 
To suppose that our common Father can be pleased 
to see His children killings each other, is to attri- 
bute to Him that of which, if any human parent 
were guilty, we should count him a monster of wick- 
edness. Should a fatiier teach his children to kill 
each other when, in their vieiv, the necessity of the 
case demanded ; and then should countenance and 
urge on ihe brotherly fight and slaughter in his 
presence and approving smile ; what would be said 
of him ? Humanity would cry out against him as an 
unnatural father. Every human beinir can look to 
the same God and say— MY FATHER. Should 
this Heavenly Father say to his children — 'My 
children, LOVE ONE ANOTHER; but there will 
be occasions when it will be necessary for you to 
fight and kill each other; of these necessary occa- 
sions, you must be judges. I would have you, 
therefore, arm yourselves, cherish and strengthen 
the war-spirit within you, study the art of killing 
each other; and then, v/hen you shall think neces- 
sity demands, in a kind and brotherly way fall upon 
and kill each other; and I, your common Father, 
will be present to aid and encourage the fraternal 
slaughter by my parental smile' — who could wish 
to be called the child of such a Father ? The Fa- 
ther of mercies pleased to see his children fighting 
and killing each other! Children — brothers and sis- 
ters, in a tender, affectionate way, fighting, dashing 
out each other's brains, and tearing out each other's 
hearts, to please and honor their common Father ! ! 

NO. Men kill their enemies solely to benefit 
themselves. The war-making power assumes that 
this is right. 

This power inculcates, also, the right to inflict 
any injury short of death. If, to carry on human 
government, we may dispose of /[/e as we see fit, 
and for our good, in the same way, and for the same 
end, we may dispose of all that belongs to life. He 



that has forfeited life, has forfeited all that belongs 
to it. Property and liberty are nothing without life ; 
and no g-overnment, based on the right to destroy 
the latter, can ever inspire respect for the former. 
Can those who steal men, dissuade others from 
stealing cattle? Can those who kill men for their 
own interests, persuade others not to enslave them 
for the same end ? Can m3.n-killcrs abolish n)an- 
stealing? What moral influence can he who wields 
the siom'd have over him who wields only the lash^ 
Property and liberty can never be regarded as sa- 
cred under a government that assumes pou'er over 
life. A war-making government can afford no pro- 
tection to human rights; because, in assaulting life^ 
the right on which all human rights de|)end, it 
teaches its subjects and all others, that man may be 
plundered of every right, and that for the interests 
of the plunderers. 

This power takes no account of the guilt or inno- 
cence of its victiuis. It kills those whom it ac- 
knowledges to be guilty of no crime ; and often for 
doing what it admits it is their right and duty to do. 
It sometimes enters into a compact to kill men for 
■what, by its own decisions, is 'obedience to God.* 
It kills men for doing what the killers them- 
selves would do in like circumstances. It 
says to the enemy, we will send a spy into your 
camp, and if you catch and hansf him, you are mur- 
derers; but if you send one into ours, and we can 
catch him, it would be our duty to hanu iiim, and 
thus retaliate. It says to the Indians, We will enter 
your country, seize your crops, cattle, houses, and 
lauds, and appropriate them to our own use; and 
this is right — but if you attempt to do so to us, it is 
onr right and duty to destroy you. It says to the 
Africans, We will steal and enslave you — but if you 
attempt to steal and enslave us, we will kill you. 
It says to the slaves. If we were in your circuriv 
stances, we would regain liberty by blood — but if 
you attempt to do so, we will shoot you down. 



Thus the war-making power sets at naught every 
principle of justice and humanity. At pleasure, and 
for no violation of moral principle, it breaks human 
necks, chops off human heads, tears out human 
hearts, and blows to atoms human bodies. This 
power is truly described by WM. GOODELL. It 
is, he says — 

' Diametrically opposed to the existence of liber- 
ty' — 'the perfection of despotism' — 'necessarily 
subversive of law ' — ' unlimited, despotic, lawless ' — 
'the origin of piracies, highway robberies, house- 
breaking, duellings, lynchings, mobs, bowie-knives, 
daggers, and the assassin's dirk' — '^ opposed to the 
supremacy of God' — 'to the equality of men' — 'to- 
accountability to a common tribunal.' * To say that 
God has authorized human governments to wield 
military power, is to say that He has absolved them 
from all allegiance to Him, that He has abdicated 
His throne in their favor, and that the subjects of 
such governments have no duties to their Creator 
which are paramount to their duties to their fellow- 
men who rule over them.' 

Such are the nature and necessary fruits of the 
war-making power. It recognizes no moral govern- 
ment — no God. Victorv', its standard of right ; de- 
feat, of wrong. It regards and treats men as beasts, 
and necessarily tends to make them so. In its esti- 
mation, man has no reason, no conscience, no souL 
The worse the man, the more ferocious and brutal, 
the better the warrior. As men become humanized, 
they cease to fight; as they become christian, they 
are wjifitted to kill, but fitted to die. 

If a man consents to vote in this government, there 
are some things against which he has no right to 
vote. No man can honestly accept the ofBce of vo- 
ter, and then vote against the existence of the gov- 
ernment. The war-wuking power is essential to its 
existence. No voter can consistently or honestly 
vote against that power. When he^totes for a Con- 



gressman or President, he must vote for them as 
they are defined by the Constitution. As there de- 
fined, Congressmen and the President are men in- 
vested, by the nation, with power to make war. 
Take away this power, and the offices cease to ex- 
ist. The Constitution is all changed. The govern- 
ment is abolished. If the right of suffrage granted 
by the government for its maintenance be a boon, 
no man can honestly accept that boon, and use it to. 
destroy the government. 

Office of Congressman. 
'AH legislative power herein granted shall be 
vested in a Congress of the United States.' (Con. 
U. S. Art. I. Sec. 1 ) The war-making power is an 
essential ingredient of this oSice. ' Congress shall 
have power to declare war, grant letters of marque 
and reprisal, raise and support armies, provide and 
maintain a navy, provide for calling forth the militia 
to execute the laws of the Union, suppress insurrec- 
tions and repel invasions, and provide for organizing, 
arming and disciplining the militia.' (Con. U. S. 
Art. 1. Sec. 8.) 

Thus this office is created and defined by the 
Constitution, and whoever votes for a Congressman 
must vote for all that is essential to it as here de- 
fined. The Constitution assumes that the war-ma- 
king power is conferred and sanctioned by God, 
and every time a man votes for Congressmen, he 
says that military defence is a chnstian act. 

Congress, having power to make war, is author- 
ized to'^do each particular thing, necessary to carry 
it on: to sack and burn towns and cities; to throw 
cannon balls and bombshells into nurseries and 
kitchens ; to destroy harvests, desolate countries, 
and drive women and children out to starve and 
freeze ; to make widows and orphans ; to enslave 
and whip; to steal, rob and murder. The Constitu- 
tion might as well specify these things and empower 
Congress to do them, as to say, 'Congress shall have 
power to declare war.' 



6 

Office of President. 

'The executive power shall be vested in a Presi- 
dent.' (Art. II. Sec. 1.) 

' The President shall be commander-in-chief of 
the army and navy of the United States.' (Con. U. 
S. Art. II. Sec. 2.) 

Whatever other duty may be involved in this of- 
fice, military command is one. This duty is speci- 
fied. The Presidential office is the highest military 
office of the nation; and tiie incumbent, whoever he 
be, must be 'commander-in-chief of the aririy and 
navy,' and take the following oath to perform the du- 
ties of that station : 

'I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully exe- 
cute the office of President of the United States, 
and will, to the best of my ability, preserve, protect 
and defend the Constitution of the United States.* 
(Con. U. S. Art. II. Sec. 1.) 

Thus, in both these offices, the war-making- power 
s an essential element of existence; and no man 
can fill tiiem without consenting to be vested with 
it. No matter v/ith what motives he accepts the of- 
fice—though it be solely to use his influence to 
discard the war-making power from the government, 
stiil, he must consent to be invested with it, and 
swear to use it in given cases, so long as the Con- 
stitution remains as it is. May a man consent to be 
invested with power to do an evil, and swear to do it, 
even for the purpose oX abolishing that evil.' With 
power to lie, in order to abolish lying ? 

Mat not a Man consent to be vested with 
THIS Power, AND resolve never, to use it.' 

The Constitution provides against this, and lays 
Congressmen and the Pre.sident under obligations 
to make war in certain specified cases. 

'The United States shall protect each of the 
States against i/JV^/s?*on ; and, on application of the 
Legislature, or of the Executive, against domeslic 
violence: (Con. U. S. Art. III. Sec. 4.) 



Here two cases are specified, in which every 
Concrressman and President is sworn to make war. 
Those offices were created by the people mainly for 
the purpose of niilitary defence ajrainst 'foreign in- 
vasion and domestic violence;' and, should these 
occur, and the incumbents of those offices refuse to 
make war, they would be guilty of perjury. 

Besides, how can a man consent to be clothed 
with power to do what he thinks wrong? He who 
would do it, proves himself dishonest. He pledges 
himself to his constituents that, if they will elect 
him, he will never make war; then consents to be 
vested with war-making power, and swears that he 
will use it in given cases! He consents to be vest- 
ed with power to do what he acknowledsfes to be 
wrong, and swears to do it, and then gravely as- 
sures us that he never intended to do it ! Such a 
man is unworthy any trust. 

Congressmen and the President Agents of 
THE Voters. 
These officers were created, and their powers and 
duties defined, by a convention of forty men, half ot 
whom were m^n-stealers, and all of them ivdn-kill- 
ers, assembled in Philadelphia in 1787, chosen and 
sent there to frame a government. They framed the 
present Constitution, and submitted it to the voters 
for their adoption. The voters adopted it. So that 
these offices, with their military powers and duties, 
were created and defined by the voters ; and every 
time they meet at the polls to vote, for Congressmen 
and a President, they adopt them, with all their es- 
sential elements, as iheir own- They elect men for 
the purpose of making war in the cases specified, 
and thf\v require them to swear that they will do it 
— and lead out the forces by land and sea, to fight 
to repel invasions and suppress insurrections. The 
voters wish to resist tliese evils by arms and blood, 
and they employ and pay Congress and the Presi- 
dent to do it as their agents. 



8 

JVoiv the ads of an agent are the acts of the employ- 
er. We do the deeds which we employ others to do, 
By my ag-ent I build a house. Though I strike not 
a blow with my own hands, it is my work. To steal, 
rob or murder by the hands of others, is the same as 
to do them with our o<vn. However guilty our 
agents may be, our guilt is the same as if our own 
hands had done the deeds. No matter whose hands 
strike the blow — if our hearts conceive it, the guilt 
is primarily and principally ours. 

Slaveholders wish to drive the Seminole Indians 
from Florida, that their fugitive slaves may no long- 
er find refuge among them. They harass them, de- 
stroy their crops and stock, on purpose to provoke 
them to retaliate. The Indians retaliate. Slave- 
holders raise the cry of Indian massacre, and apply 
to Congress and the President for protection. These 
officers being employed by the electors for this 
very purpose, butcher men, women and children till 
they are exterminated. Who is responsible ? Not 
only the officers and soldiers, Congress and the 
President, but primarily and above all, the electors. 
They create and sustain these war-making offices, 
and the robbery and murder committed on the hunt- 
ed Seminole are their own work. 

Suppose I am a planter, and want a hundred 
slaves, and send men to Africa to steal them and 
bring them to me. I, meanwhile, sit on my planta- 
tion, and move not a hand or foot in the matter. 
The piracy is done by my agents. But who acted 
as principal? Whatever guilt may attach to my 
agents, the guilt of the whole as really belongs to 
me as if it had been done by my own hands. I am 
the chief pirate, and all human tribunals would try 
me as principal ; my agents, as accessories. This 
is self-evident — for were there no slaveholders, 
there would be no men-stealers. 

So the slaveholders are, and ever have been, the 
principals in the African slave trade. The United 



9 

States punishes the traffic with death. On whom 
does the sentence fall ? Only on the agents. The 
slaveholders, the real pirates, escape — while the 
agents are hung. If any are to be hung, the slave- 
holder ought to hang first, for he is the moving 
cause of the dark and direful trade. 

Of the eighteen millions in the United States, 
only two millions and a half are voters. These con- 
stitute the sovereignty or governing power of the 
nation, and hold absolute, uncontrolled, discretion- 
ary power over the property, liberty and lives of the 
rest. Their will is law, and to it all must yield, or 
die. At their request, I accept the office of ' com- 
mander-in-chief of the army' — and 'solemnly swear 
faithfully to execute the duties of the office.' The 
slaves assert their rights by an appeal to arms. I 
and the voters, whose agent I am, have declared 
that it is their duty thus to obtain and defend their 
rights — that ^resistance to tip'ants is obedience to God^ 
Yet my constituents are pledged to support slave- 
holders in their tyranny ; and one express object, in 
appointing me their 'commander-in-chief,' is, that 
in case the slaves should obey God, and resist their 
oppressors, to lead forth the army and destroy them. 
VVhen I took the office, (which, in this light, can 
be viewed only as the office of a murderer,) I as- 
sured the voters, with an oath, that 1 would execute 
their pleasure in this matter. I direct the army 
against the slaves struggling for liberty, and slay 
thousands whom the whole war-making world pro- 
nounces innocent. Who murdered these innocents? 
The voters, who chose me to be their military chief- 
tain. 

Nat Turner and his compeers, in imitation of 
Washington and the revolutionary heroes, appealed 
to arms to free themselves from a bondage, 'one 
hour of which,' as Jefferson says, ' is fraught with 
more misery than ages of that which our fathers 
arose in rebellion to oppose.' The President, ac- 



- 10 

cording to the orders of his constituents and his oath 
of office, directed the army ajrainst them, and slew 
them. Who murdered Nat Turner? The voters 
acted as principals in the bloody tragedy. The 
rest were mere agents — willing ones indeed— yet 
tools. 

How IS EACH Voter Guilty of the Whole ? 

Suppose I steal a man with my own hands. Here 
my guiJt is obvious — I have no associates. I em- 
ploy another to steal him. Here, too, my guilt is 
plain. But I have an associate — my agent. I am 
principal. Ten of us unite and e;nploy another to 
steal a man. Here, also, my guilt is evident. I 
have nine associates as principals, and one as agent. 
But my guilt is not lessened by having ten asso- 
ciates. As to criminality, I stand where I did when 
I, alone, employed the agent, and when I did the 
deed with my own hands. The only difference is — 
now there are ten principals, instead of one, all equal- 
ly gi'i'ty- Each of the ten, together with the agent, 
is guilty of the whole transaction, the same as if he 
had done it with his own liands. Had there been 
millions, instead of one or ten, to employ the agent, 
each would have done the deed, and been ffuilty of 
the whole. My guilt can never be diminished by 
the number engaged with me in any villany. If I 
vote for a military chieftain, or for the captain of a 
band of pirates, I am responsible for all that my 
agent does in his official capacity, though millions 
voted with me. 

Men are not responsible to God as organizations^ 
but as individuals. TliouL^h millions unite anfl elect 
the same agent to do the same deed, yet each is as 
responsible for the whole as it he acted alone. Men 
must account to God, not by sectarian or national 
compacts, but by individuals. 'Each one must give 
account of himself to God.' 

Each voter is the Congress, the President, the 
commander-in-chief, the constable, jailor and hang- 



11 

man ; the army and navy; and when the Seminoles 
and Cherokees are plundered and murdered; tlie fu- 
gitive slave taken buck to chains and tears; the 
slave-il'ade carried on ; the slaves shot down for do- 
ing what the nation declares is 'obedience to God;' 
these deads are done by the two and a half millions 
of voters ; and each voter is principal in these acts 
of villany and outrage. Each voter breaks all the 
necks that are broken by the government ; and does 
all the shooting and stabbing done by it. 

How can any follower of the Prince of Peace 
identify himself with the Federal Government as a 
voter 1- He must vote for war, and for all its bloody 
essentials. His heart is full of love to enemies — of 
a love that seeketh not her own — that is gentle, 
kind, forgiving, long-suffering; the martial spirit 
has given place to the spirit of Jesus, and his hands 
can never execute a deed of violence and blood 
which the kind and gentle spirit within him can 
never conceive. How can a spirit, thus baptized 
into Christ, go to the ballot-box and vote for a power 
that is 'unluTiited, despotic, lawless,' and 'opposed to 
the supremacy of God.' In doing so, he votes for 
'piracy, highway robbery, duellings, lynchings, 
mobs, bowie-knives, daggers, and the assassin's dirk.' 
Can a man vote for war, and pray that all wars may 
cease ? Can he vote for swords and guns, and pray 
that all deadly weapons may be beaten up? He 
might as well pray for temperance, and vote for 
drunkenness — as well pray for liberty and vote for 
slavery, as pray for peace and vote for war. To vote 
for Congressmen and President, as these offices are 
defined, is to vote that the peaceful kingdom of the 
Son of God is a lie, for it is voting against its essen- 
tial spirit and fundamental principles. A man might 
as well be a robbgr or an assassin, as a voter for the 
war-making power. 

We have been a nation sixty years, and engaged 
in war with England, Algiers and the Indians, twen- 



1^ 

ly years ; and against Humanity, in the person of 
the slave, during the whole time of our national ex* 
istence— defying God, hunting, hanging, buying and 
selling his image. The government has butchered 
over one million in war, unaccused, and unconvicted 
of any crime. God has created human beings in 
his own likeness, and crowned them with glory and 
honor. The voters, who constitute the Federal 
Government, have stood with the uplifted axe of 
execution to cut their heads off, or with rifle and 
blood-hound to hunt them down. 

A dread responsibility rests on each man, when, 
in the face of all the facts respecting the nature and 
necessary tendency of the war-power, he sanctions 
and sustains it by voting for a war-making Con- 
gress and President. Their hands and garments 
are dripping with innocent blood. It is no less hos- 
tile to the spirit and precepts of Christianity, and to 
the existence and well-being of society, to vote for 
a war-making Congress and President, than for 
kidnapping and murder. You can as innocently 
vote for the latter as for the former. 

Had the Constitution said, ' Congress shall have 
power to abolish marriage and establish concubi- 
nage—to abolish liberty and establish slavery — to 
abolish Christianity and establish paganism^to de- 
throne God and establish atheism,' would you vote 
for Congressmen ? Especially when you consider 
that they must swear to use this power and do these 
deeds in specified cases ? But when the Constitution 
confers on Congress 'power to declare war, issue 
letters of marque and reprisal,' &.c., it authorizes 
it to do all these, and more. Had the Constitution 
enumerated the i^ems essential to the existence and 
conduct of war, and then said — ' Congress shall 
have power to do these,' you could no more vote for 
a Congressman than for the unutterable anguish and 
horror of the slave-ship and slave-auction, or ihe 
blood and carnage of piracy. 



13 

All preparations for war, in this nation, are begun 
at the ballot-box. Voting is the first step ; and ev* 
ery course of action begun there, if resisted, must 
end on the gallowsor the battle-field. A bullet is in 
every ballot; and when the ballot is cast into the 
box, the bullet goes in with it. They are insepara- 
ble, as the government is now constituted. Every 
voter, as he casts in his vote, says — 'This is my 
will — if you resist it, I will kill you*' Every ballot 
contains a threat of death; and he, who casts it, 
pledges himself to aid the government to execute it 
The ballot-box is the first step — the gallows or bat- 
tle-field the last ; and whoever takes the first, must 
lake the last. There is no consistent or honest stop^ 
ping place between. Every man who consents to 
express his will in a ballot, pledges himself to exe- 
cute it on the gibbet or the battle-field* 

Nor can you escape this conclusion by saying — ' 
you are in the minority. This is a government of 
the majority ; and when a man consents to receive 
and exercise the right of suflTrage under it, he con- 
sents that the majority shall rule, and pledges 
himself to aid in executing the will of the majority. 
Whether he votes with the majority or not, by con- 
senting to vote at all, he becomes responsible for 
what it does. 

Members of the American Peace Society* 
Can these, without acknowledged wrong, sustain, 
by their votes, the offices of Congress atid President? 
They say in their Constitution, Art. 2d, that ' All 
War is contrary to The spirit of the gos- 
pel.' In explaining this, in 1838, the Society says, 

* We consider it (the above expression) as designed 
to assert that all national wars are inconsistent with 
Christianity, including those supposed or alleged to 
be defensive.'' 

In their tenth annual report, in 1838, they say— 

* The custom of war is incompatible with the genius, 
precepts and aims of Christianity* The whole 



14 

war system is founded in guilt and blood, is 
utterly wrong in its origin, its principles, and its 
means.' 

Of course, according to the American Peace So- 
ciety, to vote for war-power is to vote against the 
'genius, precepts and aims of Christianity,' and to 
vote for what is 'founded in guilt and blood, and ut- 
terly wrong in its origin, principles and means.' 
And according to the decision of tlie same Society, 
every Congressman and President is sworn to act 
' contrary to the spirit of the gospel,' and to oppose 
the 'genius, precepts and aims of Christianity' — for 
they are sworn to make war in specified cases. Can 
they innocently sustain these offices by their votes'^ 

Friends. 

Persons are excluded from the Society of Friends, 
for making swords and guns for the army — for train- 
ing in a militia company — for holding the offices of 
constable, sheriff or hangman — for trading in goods 
known to be obtained by privateering. 

But, after all this, Friends vote for a war- 
making Congress and President ! They disown 
a man if he joins a militia company and votes for a 
corporal; but a man may become a constituent part 
of a war-making government, and vote for the ' com- 
mander-in-chief o\ i\\e army and navy,' and remain a 
member in good standing, and be entitled to sit on 
the uppermost seat as a minister or elder ! Verily, 
they '■choke at a gnat, and swallow a camel.' If a 
Quaker declares war himself, and leads forth the 
army, he is disowned ; but he may vote for others 
to do these things, and nothing is said. If he kills 
men with his own hands, he is doomed, but when he 
does it by proxy, all is well, especially if the proxy 
be not a brother Friend. 

The American Peace Society and the Society of 
Friends, while they vote for a war-making Congress 
and President, are practical enemies of the cause of 
Peace. They pray and talk for peace, and vote 



15 

and act for war— like those who say men should not 
steal, yet they steal. They say war is wrong-, yet 
rote for it. The report of such peace-men is not be- 
lieved. 

OBJECTIONS. 
Must Elect the best Men. 

An office is created. It will be filled, and the ef- 
fect of the office on the community will depend on' 
the spirit and principles of him who fills it. There' 
are two candidates — the one adorned by every vir- 
tue, the other stained with every vice. My vote' 
would decide the election. Shall I vote? Not till I 
know the nature and duties of the office ; for in 
voting- for either candidate, I also vote for the office 
with all its essentiaV powers and duties; Is it a man- 
enslaving and a man-killing office ? Is it a war- 
making- office? In voting-, must I vote for 'power to^ 
declare war' — a power which is a practical denial of 
Christianity— which is necessarily destructive of all 
order and security, and the source of all crimes P 
If the candidate were an angel of purity and wis- 
dom, and if by voting I could keep out one allied to 
fiends in temper and wickedness, I could not vote. 
I could not hold the office myself, and, of course, 
could not elect another to it. I could not employ 
another to do what it would be wrong for me to do. 

I must look at the office first, and ask — Are its 
powers such as I can rightfully sustain, and its duties 
such as I can innocently perform? This must be 
settled first. Talk not of the qualities of the candi- 
date^ but of the nature of the office. I cannot vote 
for a war-making office, while I profess to be a dis- 
ciple of the Prince of Peace; and to be governed 
by his spirit and laws. 

In the heat and strife of a contested election, men 
look away from the powers and duties of the office 
for which they vote, to the character of the candi- 
date. I would direct attention to the nature of the- 



16 

office first. I would have men see what they vote 
for, and what they sustain, when they vote for Con- 
jrressmen and a President. No matter what may be 
the immediate result, if in voting- for these offices I 
sustain the war-making; power, which has ever con- 
verted human beings into beasts of prey — made man 
the foe of man — arrayed the children of a common 
Father against each other in deadly feud, and made 
the earth a mere slaughter-house for man — then I 
may not vote. 

But ive must have the best men to Jill these offices. 
So it was once said of the rum-seller's office. Re- 
spectable and sober men must be chosen — none oth- 
ers were considered fitted to deal out intoxicating 
drinks. So praying deacons and consecrated elders 
were sought out and licensed to sell rum. These 
could sell it, and make drunkards prayerfully, and in 
a consecrated way. It would never do to put impi- 
ous, swearing, prayerless men into a rum-seller's 
office. But total abstinence has taught a better les- 
son—that unprincipled and wicked men should be 
left to fill unprincipled and wicked offices. Drunk- 
ards to fill a drunkard-making office. The office 
itself will sooner be put down. 

So, as long as the offices of Congressman and 
President are war-making offices — savage and mur- 
derous in their nature and duties — let the most des- 
perate ruffians and murderers be chosen to fill them, 
if any, for such bloody-minded men are already fitted 
to perform their murderous duties, and such will 
more speedily bring the offices themselves into dis- 
repute. Never attempt to gild a bloody and murde- 
rous office by a virtuous incumbent. Would you elect 
a kind and benevolent man to the office of a slave- 
driver? Would you appoint an honest man captain 
of a pirate ? A christian to head a band of midnight 
assassins ? Christ to sit on the throne of hell, and do 
the devil's work ? No more should you elect a fol- 
lower of the Prince of Peace to a loar-making office. 



17 

Let none but murderers bo cliosen to a murderers 
office. 

But the offices exist, and unit he filled, and Ave shall 
be greatly affected by the manner in which they are 
filled. Is it not our duty to try to have them filled 
hy true and goocv men ? The fact that any man know-, 
inor the nnture and duties of a Congressman or Pres- 
ident, will consent to hold these offices is, of itself, 
sufficient evidence that he is not a good and true 
man. A crew of pirates or a band of assassins, 
might offer the same reason to justify themselves 
in voting for a captain to head them in their villany. 
The offices indeed exist. But who created them ? 
The very raffians who plead their existence as a rea- 
son why they should vote tor some persons to fill 
them. We might as well say the office of a corpo- 
ral, brigadier or hangman exists, and will be filled, 
and we will elect men who will do tlie fighting and 
hanging piously, devotionally, and in a holy way. If 
men will create war-making offices and fill them, 
let us see to it that our hands are not stained with 
innocent blood. 

Must vote for the SLAVE. 

Suppose the abolition of slavery throughout the 
world depended on a president election, and that my 
vote would throw the scale for abolition. Shall I 
vote? Not, if by voting, I must sanction a power 
' that is diametrically opposed to the existence of 
liberty — the perfection of despotism' I may not 
vote for the ' war-system that is founded in guilt, 
and blood, and utterly wrong in its origin, its princi- 
ples and means' — even to abolish slavery. 

It would indeed be a trying case. Millions before 
mine eyes writhing under the horrors of the chattel 
principle, and by dropping a bit of paper into the 
ballot-box, I can instantly relieve them ! Who that 
has any flesh in his heart could refuse ? But sup- 
pose that in order to vote, I must become a member 
of a social compact or government, based on the 



18 

right to kill men at will, and for its own benefit, au^ 
must vote for the war-making; power — a power op- 
posed to Christianity, to the Prince of Peace, to the 
brotherhood of man, to the fraternity and supremacy 
of God — shall I vote? I must violate the law of love, 
if I do ; and the irreatest wron^r 1 could do to the 
■cause of human freedom would be to violate that 
law to abolish slavery. By its violation, the slave is 
a slave. Shall I violate it to relieve him? Never 
— till we are allowed to do evil that good may come. 
Till men cease to be brethren, and tire divested of 
moral nature and responsibility; till God ceases to 
be our Father and lawgiver — till Christ ceases lobe 
ourexample — till it ceases to be our duty to love 
and foririve our enemies— or till love and forgive- 
ness can be thrust into our enemies with swords and 
bavonets — I cannot vote for a war-making Congress 
and President, even to deliver a world from oppres- 
sion. 

Slavery can never be voted down by voting for 
war-making power, for slavery itself is but the nat- 
ural and necessary fruit of this power. It is ab- 
surd to talk of voting against slavery by voting for 
ivar; for whoso votes for war, or military defence, 
votes for ^slavery. Suppose the Constitution had 
said — ' Congress shall have power to steal sheep,' 
and 'the President shall be commander-in-chief of 
a band of sheep-stealers ; ' or had it said — ' Congress 
shall have power to steal men,^ and ' the President 
shall be commander-in-chief of a band of men-steal- 
ers;' would you vote for sheep-stealing or man- 
stealing power to abolish sheep-stealing or man- 
Stealing? You might as well vote for power to 
abolish Christianity, in order to suppress Infidelity. 
Truth can never be established by investing Con- 
gress with power to tell lies. Temperance could 
never be promoted by investing Congress with 
power to make drunkards. Theft can never be 
abolished by voting for murder. Liberty can never 



19 

be protected by investing" Congress and the Pre- 
sident with power to kill men; a lesser right, by au- 
thorizing the destruction of a greater. To prevent 
a man from going nine miles, would you authorize 
him to go ten ? To prevent a ruffian from knocking 
his victim down, v/ould you authorize him to kill him ? 
If the ruffian has power to A:z7/, he, of course, will 
feel at liberty to knock' down. It is as absurd and 
irrational to authorize a government to kill men, to 
prevent men frxDm being enslaved; or to empower 
them to make ivar, to abolish slavery. 

Slavery is based on violence; it can never be abol- 
ished by violence; the throne of violence can never 
be demolished by violence; till drunkenness can 
abolish drunkenness ; slavery, slavery ; and till Beel- 
zebub can cast out Beelzebub. ' They that take the 
sword, shall perish by the sword.' ' Whoso shed- 
deth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed.' 
Blood begets blood ; violence, violence. 

I would remJer safe my own life, and the lives of 
others. So I surround myself and all others with 
deadly weapons; and study the art of killing men, 
and teach it to all around me. I miglUas well guard 
ao-ainst intemperance by drinking nmi, and urging 
all others to drink it. What is it that endangers 
human rights, property, liberty and life ? VIO- 
LENCE.. So to guard these rights, we base the 
government on violence — invest Congress and the 
President with the right to commit violence — fill 
the land with the means of violence, and compel the 
people to study how to do violence to each other! 
It is downright infatuation ! 

Those who plead their regard for the slave, to 
justify voting for a war-making Congress and Pres- 
ident, deceive themselves and others. They cannot 
have a true and efficient regard for the slave when 
they vote for blood and carnage to procure his re- 
demption. No man can have a true and hearty de- 
sire to relieve hunted and imbruted humanity, and 



50 

vote for the war-system which he acknowledges to 
be 'founded in guilt and blood, contrary to the ge- 
nius, precepts and aims of Christianity,' and for a 
power wlii(.-h he declares to be the origin of ' rob- 
beries, piracies, bowie-knives and the assassin's 
dirk.' No man can love the slaves who will violate 
a known and acknowledged rule of right to free 
them. 

But if we hod a-ny regard for justice and humani- 
ty, we should never appeal to the syinpnihies of a 
man to induce him to violate his conscience, nor 
would our sympathies for the slave ever tempt us 
to deviate from the law of truth and right to procure 
his deliverance. Our consciences and sympathies 
would draw the same way. We should abstain from 
voting for a "a ar-making Congress and President be- 
cause we feel for the slave. Our sympathy for out- 
raged humanity would forever hold us back from the 
ballot-box in a war-making government. We should 
as soon cut a man's throat to save him from choak- 
inir, or blow his brains out to cure the headache, as 
vote for war to abolish slavenj. Those who do vote 
for a war-making Congress and President to abolish 
slavery, vote to kvll men to prevent them from be- 
inor STOLEN. They Vote for MURDER to prevent 
THEFT!!! H. C. WRIGHT. 

Philadelphia, Aug, 20, 1841. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



012 028 716 3 # . 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 





012 028 716 3 



